Between Casey Hayward and Sam Shields, that was the potential for 4, 4!!! Int's. Not only would OT not been an issue, GB wins handily.
*sigh*
GBFanForLife posted:Reading this thread, there were many mentions of "superior team". Can someone please explain?
7 point favorite says it all. Won by 6.
Abby also caught the ball with Cobb on the field.
YES! 7 pages in - excellent. But I'm still not sure I'm unconvinced, and of what. Keep up the good work!
by the way, has anyone seen or heard from Satan lately? I'm worried about his well being at this point.
I may not be sure I'm not unconvinced either. Either I am unsure I'm convinced or I'm not sure I am unsure. 50/50.
Satan has been busy entertaining Cam since they made that deal earlier this year.
Boris posted:I think that's at least the 3rd time that link has been posted now
That's because it gives the definitive argument that MM should have went for 2.
Case in point , it would have allowed Aaron Rodgers a chance to complete the "Greatest Drive in NFL History"...which from that perspective really bums me out.
Secondly...the MM excuse that Cobb wasn't available gets blown out of the water by the fact that not having Cobb also lessens your chances of beating the Cards in OT. So the right call...math wise...is still to go for 2. It's what a smart coach would do.
But MM doesn't have a hair on his ass....so we are left with the apologizers to piss away an extremely rare chance at NFL immortality.
MM has given us a lot of wins and one Championship...I'm grateful for that...but let it be clear...he has also left a LOT on the table. That's what you get with MM.
Case closed. Nuff said.
oldschool posted:Boris posted:I think that's at least the 3rd time that link has been posted now
That's because it gives the definitive argument that MM should have went for 2.
It does if you believe math wins football games. It does not take into account the personnel (as McCarthy commented on) available for the play.
As for those saying Abby caught a 2 pointer the week before... from what I read Cobb is on field as the primary target or as a decoy for each of their 2 pt plays.
I think the Cards were stunned, thought they had it won, and the element of surprise would've worked in our favor, especially if we show run, go play action rollout and give Arod the run or pass option...
Hungry5 posted:As for those saying Abby caught a 2 pointer the week before... from what I read Cobb is on field as the primary target or as a decoy for each of their 2 pt plays.
I think Janis! might have made a pretty good decoy right about then.
Maybe, if as EKB suggested they were going for 2 pts from their own 2 yard line.
Going into the game with Cobb figuring in every one of their 2 pt plays, that is a failure.
oldschool posted:MM has given us a lot of wins and one Championship...I'm grateful for that...but let it be clear...he has also left a LOT on the table. That's what you get with MM.Case closed. Nuff said.
far as I can tell, I haven't seen MM make a block, throw a pass, run with the football, make an INT, make a tackle, kick a ball or forget to block on an onside kick to date...
Hungry5 posted:oldschool posted:Boris posted:I think that's at least the 3rd time that link has been posted now
That's because it gives the definitive argument that MM should have went for 2.
It does if you believe math wins football games. It does not take into account the personnel (as McCarthy commented on) available for the play.
As for those saying Abby caught a 2 pointer the week before... from what I read Cobb is on field as the primary target or as a decoy for each of their 2 pt plays.
Talking about Cobb not being available for a 2 pt play must also factor in that Cobb isn't available to help you win in OT which also lessens your chances of winning in OT.
That is what is being lost in the Cobb wasn't available for a 2pt. play argument.
Tdog posted:oldschool posted:MM has given us a lot of wins and one Championship...I'm grateful for that...but let it be clear...he has also left a LOT on the table. That's what you get with MM.Case closed. Nuff said.
far as I can tell, I haven't seen MM make a block, throw a pass, run with the football, make an INT, make a tackle, kick a ball or forget to block on an onside kick to date...
How in the hell could Aaron throw the football on a 2 pt. play if MM decides to kick the extra point?
Far as I can tell...MM's decision makes it impossible.
oldschool posted:MM has given us a lot of wins and one Championship...I'm grateful for that...but let it be clear...he has also left a LOT on the table. That's what you get with MM.
Case closed. Nuff said.
MM has definitely NOT met my expectations, that's for sure, and it's not like my expectations are all that unreasonable.
All I expect from him is a Super Bowl win every year since 2006, AND for him to retroactively win every Super Bowl since 1967. Can't be too hard, after all, Vince Lombardi and Mike Holmgren have taken part of the load off his back.
oldschool posted:Hungry5 posted:oldschool posted:Boris posted:I think that's at least the 3rd time that link has been posted now
That's because it gives the definitive argument that MM should have went for 2.
It does if you believe math wins football games. It does not take into account the personnel (as McCarthy commented on) available for the play.
As for those saying Abby caught a 2 pointer the week before... from what I read Cobb is on field as the primary target or as a decoy for each of their 2 pt plays.
Talking about Cobb not being available for a 2 pt play must also factor in that Cobb isn't available to help you win in OT which also lessens your chances of winning in OT.
That is what is being lost in the Cobb wasn't available for a 2pt. play argument.
Not really. IIRC they were down 7-0 when Cobb went out so they took lead and eventually came back to tie the game all without Cobb on the field. Also, McCarthy said as part of his reason for kicking was the play of the defense and his confidence in them.
If Cobb was your primary decory then yeah, you kick. Cobb couldn't get open to save his life this year. He was outplayed by James Jones, who is like 79 in Packer years.
Winner/winner... chicken dinner for Hungry
But should a non-superior team go for 2?
In conclusion:
Some of us have stones and some have raisins.
Some of us want the ball in #12's hands with 1 play left and the game on the line no matter who the receivers are while others feel we are better served going to OT where we have routinely failed.
Moving on.
Tdog posted:...by the way, has anyone seen or heard from Satan lately?
good point...I haven't seen a post from Henry in a while, either!
"Some of us have stones and some have raisins"?
WTF man. Do you still play with army men? I've got news for you. That little parachute ain't ever going to open no matter how many times you throw it off the upper deck of your bunk bed.
Tdog posted:YES! 7 pages in - excellent. But I'm still not sure I'm unconvinced, and of what. Keep up the good work!
by the way, has anyone seen or heard from Satan lately? I'm worried about his well being at this point.
7 pages. Pretty amazing.
Satan is around. He e-mails me privately He's proud of the Packers. He'll show up eventually, I'm certain.
Damn, this thread has convinced me if we had gone for 2 all year we'd have been 16-0....aww shucks.
McGin thinks "heavens no", you don't go for 2 there.
That should be good for another 7 pages.
Had it worked, ESPN would've gone ballistic and praised MM's cajones all week long...
YATittle posted:Had it worked, ESPN would've gone ballistic and praised MM's cajones all week long...
And had it failed?
MM comes up to the podium and says,
1. We had the momentum in our favor, AR and the OLine and Janis were hot right then, in that moment.
2. We were pretty banged up and tired and I didn't want to extend the game any longer when I had a chance to win it right there.
3. My/our recent OT history isn't good, I wanted to avoid OT if at all possible.
4. I didn't want to take a chance on the coin flip, where we wouldn't get a chance with the ball.
5. You want your best players on the field in crunch time. AR is our best player. I am not going to have the game decided with out best player on the bench.
6. Our defense had given up over 200 yards in the second half and without forcing a turnover, we were not able to stop AZ from scoring.
7. Our offense had been having a tough time. We could not even get a first down on our last two drives unless is was a hail mary type play. I did not feel good about them going 80 yards for a score with our 4th, 5th and 6th WRs.
8. This team has played several recent OT games where our offense never saw the field. I did not want that to happen again.
Who is gonna argue with him?
Bad Bob? Please 
STFU
This type of game calling will cause more heartburn in Vegas.
Let's Do It!!!!
Had it failed I think they still praise MM. I keep coming back to the lesser team should always want 1 play to decide a game and the better team should always want to extend the game. Why? Anything can happen on a single play - just look at the hail mary. But with 20 more plays? The better team usually rises to the top because over time, the better team will "win" more plays. Think of blackjack in Las Vegas; the casino wants you to stay as long as possible because they know that over time, their 2-5% advantage will eventually lead to a win. On the flip side, those who "win" in blackjack are those who identify those couple of hands where they have an advantage and bet heavily (ie: card counters). To me, that was the 2 point conversion. Cards were deflated and Packers were riding high.
I think it also gives the team a boost going into 2016, knowing their coach has the balls to go for 2 points on a season ending play. Players love that stuff.
Lesser team?
"We're nobodies underdog."
"That's a losers mentality."
"Statistics are for losers."
Says the guy who has now lost VERY winnable back to back playoff games as the underdog.
You are nobodies underdog?
Prove it.
Grow a pair and win the game.
I really think they would've converted the 2 point try.
That game alone would've been magical...immortality.
Instead we're "treated" to another instant classic the Packers are on the wrong side of
How about this. 13% of all NFL drives end in a turnover.
The Cardinals had had 10 drives in regulation. Of those 10 drives 2 had ended in interceptions with another 3 interceptions dropped. This isn't even factoring in the bad throw by Palmer that was tipped and resulted in a TD (easily could have been an interception or at least they settle for 3). The Cardinals had come close to turning the ball on approximately 50% of their possessions. Momentum had turned towards us and the pressure was on Palmer. He pulled it off but he had played a poor game to that point and look how he played the following week against Carolina when the defense didn't drop his poor throws. We weren't up against Tom Brady. The game could have just has easily ended with a pick by GB and a Crosby FG to win.
So true about Palmer. Man he stunk. Our DBs need to spend time with the jugs machines....
The Crusher posted:The game could have just has easily ended with a pick by GB and a Crosby FG to win.
Just as easily as what?
Scoring from the 2 yard line?
Doubtful. There is a lot of hope and "what ifs" in your scenario.
Info posted earlier claimed the chances of completing the 2 point play were 57% based past evidence.
If they had any stones they would've went for 3 or maybe 4. Pussies.
http://www.sportingcharts.com/...ion-statistics/2015/
Interesting to see Denver, New England, Carolina and Arizona completed ZERO 2 point conversions in 2015. The only team to try one was Denver (and NE in the playoffs).
Let's beat this horse...